I wrote in Charging the Mound about how LoJack sponsored John Buck being caught stealing down 7-0 in the sixth inning during one of last week's White Sox-Royals games.
And the more I think about it, the more absurd it is. It's one thing to sponsor a home run, or a complete game - excellence in sports linked to excellence at whatever the sponsor does.

But when you get literal and specific, like linking a caught stealing on the basepaths to being caught stealing a car, (or to catching a crook trying to steal your car), it's a slippery slope. Next, we'll have the California Tort Lawyers sponsor every hit by pitch. "This hit by pitch is sponsored by the California Association of Tort Lawyers - if you or someone you know gets drilled by a hard object, you can sue them for assault and battery." Or after two players collide in the outfield, "This collision is sponsored by Geico auto insurance - when you get into an accident, our collision specialists will..." "This pulled hamstring is sponsored by..." "This rain delay is sponsored by ..." "This terrorist attack is sponsored by..." Etc., etc.

Maybe RotoWire can sponsor the next charging of the mound. If we get an Izzy Alcantara or a George Bell situation, maybe I'll get some local Tae Kwon Do place to co-sponsor it with us.

Comments....

Or ***a href="http://www.dodgerblues.com/content/features_fights.html#chanho"***Chan Ho Park karate kicking Tim Belcher***/a***... that was also classic. As for the sponsorship problem, if it allows teams to charge more for broadcasting rights and reduces the marginal value of my ticket or concession, then label me the "La-Z-Boy home viewer of the game"Posted by bscwik at 4/24/2006 2:54:00 PM

I prefer the Ed Ott flipping of Felix Milan.

Do you think Keith Hernandez read your blog posting when he said that dugouts are "Just For Men"?

Posted by jtopper at 4/25/2006 7:14:00 AM

You must be logged in to post a comment. Click here to log in or register with RotoWire.com.